From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: Linux-pm mailing list <linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org,
USB list <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Problems with remote-wakeup settings
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2010 21:54:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201003062154.02199.rjw@sisk.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1003052316290.10381-100000@netrider.rowland.org>
On Saturday 06 March 2010, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> > > So the problem is that subsystems can't usefully set the can_wakeup
> > > flag before doing either device_initialize() or device_register().
> > > This can be fixed easily by removing the call in device_initialize().
> >
> > PCI depends on the flag being unset when pci_pm_init(dev) is called.
> >
> > If that's still valid after removing the call in device_initialize(), I'm fine
> > with the removal.
>
> It should still be valid. After all, there's nothing else to set the
> flag except for other parts of the PCI core.
All right, then.
> > > Agreed, ethtool and sysfs should affect the same flags.
> >
> > Yeah, but. Right now, if the setting is changed via sysfs, it doesn't modify
> > the WoL setting as visible by ethtool.
>
> > > I don't understand. Do you mean there's no way to update the
> > > _device's_ WoL setting when the sysfs attribute is changed?
> >
> > There's no code for that, that's the problem.
> >
> > > The device's WoL setting matters only at suspend time. So the network
> > > driver's suspend routine ought to test device_may_wakeup() to see
> > > whether or not WoL should be enabled. Maybe this can be centralized
> > > somewhere in the network stack.
> >
> > Maybe. The problem is people expect wakeup to work once WoL has been set
> > with the help of ethtool and they expect it to work if the WoL is set by
> > default.
>
> It's not difficult in theory to tie together the WoL setting and the
> wakeup flag:
>
> If ethtool changes the WoL setting, the driver's ioctl handler
> should make the corresponding change to the wakeup flag.
>
> If ethtool queries the WoL setting, the ioctl handler should
> check the wakeup flag. If the flag is off, it should report
> that WoL is disabled; if the flag is on, it should report that
> WoL is enabled. (The same check should be made in the suspend
> routine.)
That's done this way already in all drivers I know, but we need a hook
from wake_store() back to the driver.
> > > And also IMO, enabling WoL by default is very questionable. But that's
> > > a separate matter.
> >
> > That's been a common practice for years in the network adapter land and I don't
> > think we're able to change that now. Besides, if the WoL is set to g by
> > default, which also is common, that doesn't really lead to any problems.
>
> All right, we can declare that network drivers are allowed to enable
> WoL by default (like keyboard drivers). There shouldn't be any problem
> provided they initialize the wakeup setting before registering the
> network interface, so that the initialization doesn't override any
> action by udev.
That sounds reasonable.
Rafael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-06 20:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-05 16:23 Problems with remote-wakeup settings Alan Stern
2010-03-05 20:38 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
[not found] ` <201003052138.53647.rjw-KKrjLPT3xs0@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-05 20:59 ` Alan Stern
2010-03-05 21:08 ` Oliver Neukum
2010-03-05 22:04 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-03-06 4:16 ` Alan Stern
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1003052314130.10381-100000-pYrvlCTfrz9XsRXLowluHWD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>
2010-03-06 4:36 ` Andrey Borzenkov
2010-03-05 21:59 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-03-06 4:34 ` Alan Stern
2010-03-06 20:54 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2010-03-06 21:05 ` Alan Stern
2010-03-06 21:25 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201003062154.02199.rjw@sisk.pl \
--to=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-input@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).